Evidence map›Paper›PMID 36348972›Full record

ArticleAlzheimer's & dementia (Amsterdam, Netherlands)2022

Evaluation of dose-dependent treatment effects after mid-trial dose escalation in biomarker, clinical, and cognitive outcomes for gantenerumab or solanezumab in dominantly inherited Alzheimer's disease.

Guoqiao Wang, Yan Li, Chengjie Xiong, Eric McDade, David B Clifford, Susan L Mills, Anna M Santacruz, Andrew J Aschenbrenner, Jason Hassenstab, Tammie L S Benzinger and 21 more

Open access · goldAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Alzheimer's & dementia (Amsterdam, Netherlands), 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 6 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
6citing papers in PubMed
1.4field-weighted citation impact, top 18% of its field
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

6 citing papers in PubMed, 13 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Trial
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Amyloid-Directed Antibodies: Past, Present, and Future.Journal of Alzheimer's disease : JAD · 2024
    Review
  6. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

31 authors at 7 institutions in 4 countries.

Guoqiao WangWashington University St Louis School of Medicine St. Louis Missouri USA.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0002-6808-8737
Yan LiWashington University St Louis School of Medicine St. Louis Missouri USA.
Chengjie XiongWashington University St Louis School of Medicine St. Louis Missouri USA.
Eric McDadeWashington University St Louis School of Medicine St. Louis Missouri USA.
David B CliffordWashington University St Louis School of Medicine St. Louis Missouri USA.
Susan L MillsWashington University St Louis School of Medicine St. Louis Missouri USA.
Anna M SantacruzWashington University St Louis School of Medicine St. Louis Missouri USA.
Andrew J AschenbrennerWashington University St Louis School of Medicine St. Louis Missouri USA.
Jason HassenstabWashington University St Louis School of Medicine St. Louis Missouri USA.
Tammie L S BenzingerWashington University St Louis School of Medicine St. Louis Missouri USA.
Brian A GordonWashington University St Louis School of Medicine St. Louis Missouri USA.
Anne M FaganWashington University St Louis School of Medicine St. Louis Missouri USA.
Kelley A CoalierWashington University St Louis School of Medicine St. Louis Missouri USA.
Jorge J Libre-GuerraWashington University St Louis School of Medicine St. Louis Missouri USA.
Austin McCulloughWashington University St Louis School of Medicine St. Louis Missouri USA.
Nelly Joseph-MathurinWashington University St Louis School of Medicine St. Louis Missouri USA.
Charles D ChenWashington University St Louis School of Medicine St. Louis Missouri USA.
Catherine MummeryUniversity College London London UK.
Barbara A WendelbergerBerry Consultants LLC Austin Texas USA.
Serge GauthierMcGill University Centre for Studies on Aging in Montreal Montreal Quebec Canada.
Mario MasellisUniversity of Toronto Sunnybrook Health Sciences Centre Toronto Ontario Canada.
Karen C HoldridgeEli Lilly and Company Indianapolis Indiana USA.
Roy YaariEli Lilly and Company Indianapolis Indiana USA.
Saptarshi ChatterjeeEli Lilly and Company Indianapolis Indiana USA.
John SimsEli Lilly and Company Indianapolis Indiana USA.
Paul DelmarF. Hoffmann-La Roche, Ltd. Basel Switzerland.
Geoffrey A KerchnerF. Hoffmann-La Roche, Ltd. Basel Switzerland.
Tobias BittnerF. Hoffmann-La Roche, Ltd. Basel Switzerland.
Carsten HofmannF. Hoffmann-La Roche, Ltd. Basel Switzerland.
Randall J BatemanWashington University St Louis School of Medicine St. Louis Missouri USA.
DIAN‐TU Study Team
Washington University in St. Louis · USEli Lilly (United States) · USRoche (Switzerland) · CHBerry & Associates (United States) · USMcGill University · CASunnybrook Health Science Centre · CAUniversity College London · GB

Funding

Imaging CoreU19AG032438 · NIA · WASHINGTON UNIVERSITY · PI BATEMAN, RANDALL J · 2010 to 2025
$53.9M
DIAN-TU Next Generation Prevention Trial - Data Request Management SupplementR01AG053267 · NIA · WASHINGTON UNIVERSITY · PI BATEMAN, RANDALL J · 2017 to 2023
$34.9M
Research Education ComponentP30AG066444 · NIA · WASHINGTON UNIVERSITY · PI DAVID M. HOLTZMAN · 2020 to 2026
$28.7M
Dominantly Inherited Alzheimer's Network Trials Unit - Adaptive Prevention TrialR01AG046179 · NIA · WASHINGTON UNIVERSITY · PI BATEMAN, RANDALL J · 2014 to 2019
$26.6M
DOMINANTLY INHERITED ALZHEIMER NETWORK TRIAL: AN OPPORTUNITY TO PREVENT DEMENTIAU01AG042791 · NIA · WASHINGTON UNIVERSITY · PI BATEMAN, RANDALL J · 2013 to 2018
$8.9M
NIA NIH HHS P30 AG066444NIA NIH HHS R01 AG046179NIA NIH HHS R01 AG053267NIA NIH HHS U01 AG042791NIA NIH HHS U19 AG032438
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Introduction: While the Dominantly Inherited Alzheimer Network Trials Unit (DIAN-TU) was ongoing, external data suggested higher doses were needed to achieve targeted effects; therefore, doses of gantenerumab were increased 5-fold, and solanezumab was increased 4-fold. We evaluated to what extent mid-trial dose increases produced a dose-dependent treatment effect. Methods: Using generalized linear mixed effects (LME) models, we estimated the annual low- and high-dose treatment effects in clinical, cognitive, and biomarker outcomes. Results: Both gantenerumab and solanezumab demonstrated dose-dependent treatment effects (significant for gantenerumab, non-significant for solanezumab) in their respective target amyloid biomarkers (Pittsburgh compound B positron emission tomography standardized uptake value ratio and cerebrospinal fluid amyloid beta 42), with gantenerumab demonstrating additional treatment effects in some downstream biomarkers. No dose-dependent treatment effects were observed in clinical or cognitive outcomes. Conclusions: Mid-trial dose escalation can be implemented as a remedy for an insufficient initial dose and can be more cost effective and less burdensome to participants than starting a new trial with higher doses, especially in rare diseases. Highlights: We evaluated the dose-dependent treatment effect of two different amyloid-specific immunotherapies.Dose-dependent treatment effects were observed in some biomarkers.No dose-dependent treatment effects were observed in clinical/cognitive outcomes, potentially due to the fact that the modified study may not have been powered to detect such treatment effects in symptomatic subjects at a mild stage of disease exposed to high (or maximal) doses of medication for prolonged durations.

Indexed as

autosomal dominant Alzheimer's diseaseDominantly Inherited Alzheimer Networkdose escalationgantenerumabsolanezumab

Identifiers

PMID36348972
PMCPMC9632865
OpenAlexW4308682320

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC-ND
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.